OA183: Dissenting on the Supreme Court
**Today's episode is brought to you by Framebridge! To custom frame your favorite things, go to framebridge.com promo code: OA** Today's episode takes a deep dive into two recent 8-1 decisions by the Supreme Court:\xa0 Collins v. Virginia and\xa0Sveen v. Melin.\xa0 What makes a decision nearly unanimous, and what causes that lone Justice to dissent?\xa0 Listen and find out! Our first 8-1 case involves two unique aspects of the 4th Amendment:\xa0 the "curtilage" exception and the "automobile" exception.\xa0 Which one takes precedence, why, and which Supreme Court justice vehemently disagreed?\xa0 Find out if you agree with Thomas -- and whether the law is "a ass."\xa0 (Seriously!) Our second 8-1 case is\xa0Sveen v. Melin, which involves whether the state of Missouri can legislate certain presumptions regarding "governing instruments."\xa0 It's the Contracts Clause!\xa0 Seem arcane?\xa0 It won't after you listen to our breakdown! After that, we answer a fun listener question about how a law firm makes someone a partner in light of our assessment of the Eagan Avenatti law firm in Episode 181. Finally, we end the answer to Thomas Takes The Bar Exam #80 regarding negligence per se and an impromptu ice rink.\xa0 Remember to follow our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and like our Facebook Page\xa0so that you too can play along with #TTTBE! Recent Appearances Andrew was recently a guest on the David Pakman Show, with a two-part appearance discussing whether President Trump can be indicted and if so, whether he can pardon himself.\xa0 You can watch the video on YouTube. And if you'd like to have either of us as a guest on your show, drop us an email at openarguments@gmail.com. Show Notes & Links
- Click here to read the Supreme Court's opinion in Collins v. Virginia, and here to check out\xa0Sveen v. Melin.
- The other decision Andrew referred to was the landmark case of\xa0Shelley v. Kraemer, 334 U.S. 1 (1948).